Summary: MLK is such an awesome guy for what he's trying to say. This book, for me, is a bit light (relative to other works). Also, I think the world has moved from this point in history as relates to solutions (not as relates to the idea of dignity in labor).
The thing with MLK is that he has zero problems communicating. His language, choice of words and directness will always give him a base minimum of 3 stars. It's more that during his time of writing, these big companies were the only way. The group he's representing are those that are truly, truly poor (in a way that today is different), and those that are not even remotely allowed to participate, i.e. minorities and women.
Today, the fight has a new nuance. So yes:
p. 78 - believing you are somebody with possibilities is key. The world should be structured to do that. This was not the case back then.
That said, knowing you are somebody, you ought to do something. Still, it is the case in 2020 that some cannot, but the people he's addressing and talking about here were totally willing to do something about it. In 2020, we almost have to differentiate. B/c his solution is that those willing to do something ought to feel just fine about giving the fruits of their labor over, or that they simply don't understand the degree to which they were born lucky. Yes, def... howeveer... not quite. The solution is not to take from me. Yes, def I got to pay you a fair wage. Yes, def, I got to give opportunities, create them for others. But no, def not, I do not need to give you far beyond or for the sake of just you should deserve it.
MLK isn't necessarily saying I should, so much as the idea is simply not fleshed out in this particular book. In this particular book, we really just highlight the speaches without any of the other stuff and in 2020 I'm not 100% certain it's reasonable the reader wouldn't misunderstand it all.
p. 92 - The inequality being ridiculously egregious. Too many data points to correct it. Yes. The solution will have to come from more than the government IMO. The beast was far more pervasive than what MLK was trying to move in his time. He is right for his point in history. But now we must go with his other works...
p. 102- It is not a constitutional right that men have jobs, but it is a human right." So, I would say "yes, and." It is great that people create jobs, but it is not IMO the right of someone to give you a job. I think that you should have the ability to make a living at your joy... but you have to treat it like something you're going to be dependable doing. This is missed in this statement. He's only interested in job from the perspective being able to make a living, feed your family,etc. But this is not the path to happiness... That really would require so many make jobs or find ways to really match employer with someone who would have absolute bliss and thankfulness for being able to do that role (whether it's as a means to grow skills, an innate love for the job, or as a stepping stone to something greater). Creating that is the hard work of leaders. But I think leaders focus on things htat have nothing to do with that b/c they are generically thinking "jobs."
There are more examples of discrimination from this period. The solution that won't work though is a pure hire people and give them the opportunity to make a living. Yes, great starting place. One needs to understand that. We need to do that. IN 2020, I think there is even more that we need to do. This is where the dialogue should move.